98 degrading treatment, and we[re] qualified as terrorists without [their] liability being proven; they also suffered an arbitrary and unfair detention and were exposed to hate, public despise, harassment, and discrimination, all of which affected [their] mental health and self-esteem;” c) The “degrading and humiliating treatment” that Wilson García-Asto, and consequently, directly or indirectly, all his next of kin, had to endure, constitutes a violation of Article 11(1) of the American Convention; d) The detention conditions that Wilson García-Asto had to endure caused “serious damage to [his] self-esteem, and, consequently, to [his] mental health and to that of [his] next of kin. The fact of having a relative imprisoned for a crime of terrorism generated a stigma for the next of kin, who were repudiated, discriminated, and isolated by relatives and friends and by society as a whole;” e) Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas was detained, investigated, tried and convicted of the crime of terrorism in violation of his “privacy, since the State arrested him in his house, without an arrest warrant and without being in flagrante delicto, and accused [him] as perpetrator of the crime of terrorism, without any other evidence than its own interpretations, which did not have any connection to the crime of which he was accused; f) Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas was called “terrorist” or “terruño” when being accused as “perpetrator of the crime of terrorism, before he was fo[und] guilty in a trial, thus violating [his] right to privacy;” g) The humiliating and degrading treatment that Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas and his next of kin had to endure, as well as “the humiliating and degrading treatment […] he still has to endure, have affected [his] mental health and selfesteem;” h) The documents that the Police took from Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas, which were considered as “terrorist literature” are of an academic nature and could be part of any professional database. The exercise of a liberty recognized by the Convention, to express thoughts or participate in groups that have a common thought, “led the State to the violation of [his] Right to Privacy” as embodied in Article 11 of the Convention, regarding Article 13 thereof; i) The conduct of Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas “only constituted the exercise of his right to search for and receive information.” Exercising this right, and as a consequence of his parliamentary advisor status, he “received information regard[ing] the terrorist organization Shining Path;” j) “The facts alleged, as a whole, also affected [the] family background [of the alleged victims]; [their] detention conditions[,] the constant transfers which made visits almost impossible for their next of kin, as well as the conditions in which they were held, caused suffering and constant worry to [their] next of kin; consequently, the State “has violated Article 5 regarding the rights of the family (Article 17);” and